DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office Action regarding application number 19/243,749, filed on 06/20/2025, which is a CON of PCT/CN2025/070225, filed on 01/02/2025, and which claims foreign priority to CN 202410732397.7, filed on 06/06/2024.
This action is in response to the Applicant’s Response received 06/08/2026.
Election of Restricted Inventions
The Applicant’s election of Invention I, Species A2/B2/C1 (claims 1-17) is received.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claims 18-20 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-17 are examined below.
No claim is allowed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8-11, 13-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MEYER (US 2016/0111573 A1) in view of FROLOV (US 2009/0255567 A1).
Regarding claim 1, MEYER teaches a solar module, comprising:
a solar cell assembly (cell layer 312, Fig. 3) configured to convert light energy into electrical energy, the solar cell assembly having a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other, the first surface being capable of receiving light;
a first protective layer (front plate 306), the first protective layer being light-transmissive, the first surface of the solar cell assembly facing towards the first protective layer; and
a second protective layer (continuous backsheet 208), the second surface of the solar cell assembly facing towards the second protective layer, the first protective layer, the solar cell assembly, and the second protective layer being sequentially stacked together (see Figs),
wherein the solar cell assembly and the first protective layer are projected onto a projection plane in a stacking direction, wherein on the projection plane, a projection area of the solar cell assembly is located within a projection area of the first protective layer with a distance D1 (see “d1”) between an edge of the solar cell assembly and an edge of the first protective layer adjacent to the edge of the solar cell assembly ranging from 10 mm to 50 mm (see Fig. 3, skilled artisans are directed to select a D1 distance appropriate to avoid the solar cells from shorting out or developing high resistance leakage paths from moisture absorption of the frame, para. 55, and may include values less than and greater than 14 mm, as necessitated by obvious and routine engineering choice).
PNG
media_image1.png
803
194
media_image1.png
Greyscale
MEYER does not disclose expressly that the first and second protective layers have a curved surface.
FROLOV teaches a solar module using bifacial solar cells and having first and second protective layers with a curved surface (para. 59; Fig. 11 illustrating that all the layers of each solar cell are curved together; see also Fig. 5 illustrating the various protective layers).
PNG
media_image2.png
428
715
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify MEYER and change the shape of the first and second protection layers to be curved in order to provide a better light collection efficiency and higher angular tolerance to the array orientation with respect to light as taught by FROLOV (para. 59).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 2, modified MEYER teaches the solar module according to claim 1, wherein the solar cell assembly comprises a plurality of solar cell groups, any one of the plurality of solar cell groups comprising a plurality of solar cells (see, e.g., Fig. 2A and 5A), wherein for each of the plurality of solar cell groups:
two adjacent solar cells overlap each other with an overlapping dimension D2 ranging from 0 mm to 0.5 mm; or,
two adjacent solar cells are spaced apart by a spacing D3 ranging from 0 mm to 5 mm (cell-to-cell gap may be less than or equal to 1.5 mm, para. 86). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 4, modified MEYER teaches the solar module according to claim 2, wherein each of the plurality of solar cells has a curved surface (FROLOV, Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 5, modified MEYER teaches the solar module according to claim 1, further comprising:
a first adhesive film layer (adhesive layer 314) located between the solar cell assembly and the first protective layer, the first adhesive film layer being configured to bond the solar cell assembly and the first protective layer, and the first adhesive film layer being light-transmissive; and
a second adhesive film layer (adhesive layer 310) located between the solar cell assembly and the second protective layer, the second adhesive film layer being configured to bond the solar cell assembly and the second protective layer (see Figs).
Regarding claim 6, modified MEYER teaches the solar module according to claim 5, wherein: the second surface is capable of receiving light; and the second protective layer and the second adhesive film layer are light-transmissive (the bifacial solar cells recommended by FROLOV would have light-transmissive rear/second protective/adhesive layers).
Regarding claim 8, modified MEYER teaches the solar module according to claim 2, wherein:
the plurality of solar cell groups are sequentially arranged in a first direction; and
the plurality of solar cells in any one of the plurality of solar cell groups are sequentially arranged in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (see, e.g., Fig. 2A and 5A).
Regarding claim 9, modified MEYER teaches the solar module according to claim 1, wherein the distance D1 is equal to 25 mm (see Fig. 3, skilled artisans are directed to select a D1 distance appropriate to avoid the solar cells from shorting out or developing high resistance leakage paths from moisture absorption of the frame, para. 55, and may include values less than and greater than 14 mm, as necessitated by obvious and routine engineering choice). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 10, MEYER teaches a photovoltaic apparatus, comprising a solar module, the solar module comprising:
a solar cell assembly (cell layer 312, Fig. 3) configured to convert light energy into electrical energy, the solar cell assembly having a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other, the first surface being capable of receiving light;
a first protective layer (front plate 306), the first protective layer being light-transmissive, the first surface of the solar cell assembly facing towards the first protective layer, and the first protective layer having a curved surface; and
a second protective layer (continuous backsheet 208), the second surface of the solar cell assembly facing towards the second protective layer, the first protective layer, the solar cell assembly, and the second protective layer being sequentially stacked together, and the second protective layer having a curved surface,
wherein the solar cell assembly and the first protective layer are projected onto a projection plane in a stacking direction, wherein on the projection plane, a projection area of the solar cell assembly is located within a projection area of the first protective layer with a distance D1 (see “d1”) between an edge of the solar cell assembly and an edge of the first protective layer adjacent to the edge of the solar cell assembly ranging from 10 mm to 50 mm (see Fig. 3, skilled artisans are directed to select a D1 distance appropriate to avoid the solar cells from shorting out or developing high resistance leakage paths from moisture absorption of the frame, para. 55, and may include values less than and greater than 14 mm, as necessitated by obvious and routine engineering choice).
PNG
media_image1.png
803
194
media_image1.png
Greyscale
MEYER does not disclose expressly that the first and second protective layers have a curved surface.
FROLOV teaches a solar module having first and second protective layers with a curved surface (para. 59; Fig. 11 illustrating that all the layers of each solar cell are curved together; see also Fig. 5 illustrating the various protective layers).
PNG
media_image2.png
428
715
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify MEYER and change the shape of the first and second protection layers to be curved in order to provide a better light collection efficiency and higher angular tolerance to the array orientation with respect to light as taught by FROLOV (para. 59).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 11, modified MEYER teaches the photovoltaic apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the solar cell assembly comprises a plurality of solar cell groups, any one of the plurality of solar cell groups comprising a plurality of solar cells, wherein for each of the plurality of solar cell groups:
two adjacent solar cells overlap each other with an overlapping dimension D2 ranging from 0 mm to 0.5 mm; or,
two adjacent solar cells are spaced apart by a spacing D3 ranging from 0 mm to 5 mm (cell-to-cell gap may be less than or equal to 1.5 mm, para. 86). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 13, modified MEYER teaches the photovoltaic apparatus according to claim 11, wherein each of the plurality of solar cells has a curved surface (FROLOV, Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 14, modified MEYER teaches the photovoltaic apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the solar module further comprises:
a first adhesive film layer (adhesive layer 314) located between the solar cell assembly and the first protective layer, the first adhesive film layer being configured to bond the solar cell assembly and the first protective layer, and the first adhesive film layer being light-transmissive; and
a second adhesive film layer (adhesive layer 310) located between the solar cell assembly and the second protective layer, the second adhesive film layer being configured to bond the solar cell assembly and the second protective layer (see Figs).
Regarding claim 15, modified MEYER teaches the photovoltaic apparatus according to claim 14, wherein: the second surface is capable of receiving light; and the second protective layer and the second adhesive film layer are light-transmissive (the bifacial solar cells recommended by FROLOV would have light-transmissive rear/second protective/adhesive layers).
Regarding claim 17, modified MEYER teaches the photovoltaic apparatus according to claim 11, wherein:
the plurality of solar cell groups are sequentially arranged in a first direction; and
the plurality of solar cells in any one of the plurality of solar cell groups are sequentially arranged in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (see, e.g., Fig. 2A and 5A).
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MEYER (US 2016/0111573 A1) in view of FROLOV (US 2009/0255567 A1) as applied to claims 2 and 11 above, and further in view of PILAT (US 2018/0358494 A2).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, modified MEYER teaches the solar module according to claim 2 and 11, but does not disclose expressly a distance D4 between any two adjacent solar cell groups among the plurality of solar cell groups ranges from 3 mm to 20 mm.
PILAT teaches that bifacial solar cell groups can be used and spaced apart at a distance of 1-30 mm (para. 77).
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify the distance between any two adjacent solar cell groups among the plurality of solar cell groups to values within the range claimed because these values were already known in the art to be suitable spacing distances for adjacent solar cell groups and would not lead to any surprising or unexpected result. MPEP 2143. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MEYER (US 2016/0111573 A1) in view of FROLOV (US 2009/0255567 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of LIN (US 2014/0326306 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, modified MEYER teaches the solar module according to claim 1, but does not disclose expressly that the first and second protective layers made of tempered glass.
LIN teaches a solar cell with first and second protective layers made of tempered glass (para. 32).
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify MEYER and use tempered glass as the protective layer material to generate more power and to make the protective layers “ultrathin” as suggested by LIN (paras. 18 and 33).
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
IMADA (US 2017/0201209 A1) is cited here as relevant prior art, and extensively discusses the spacing dimension variables appropriate for solar cell modules, including spacing distances along edges (A), between solar cells in series groups (D), and between series groups (B) (see Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image3.png
294
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELO TRIVISONNO whose telephone number is (571) 272-5201 or by email at <angelo.trivisonno@uspto.gov>. The examiner can normally be reached on MONDAY-FRIDAY, 9:00a-5:00pm EST. The examiner's supervisor, NIKI BAKHTIARI, can be reached at (571) 272-3433.
/ANGELO TRIVISONNO/
Primary Examiner
Prosecution Insights